Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:67996 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47052 of 2024 Applicant :- Shivam @ Shubham Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Madan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. Learned State Law Officer has informed that notice to the informant has been served on 19.12.2024. 3. Heard Sri Madan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Ifrah Islam, learned State Law Officer and perused the material placed on record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.672 of 2024, under Sections 64, 351(2) B.N.S. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Civil Line, District- Moradabad, during the pendency of trial. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The victim is a consenting party as is but evident from her statement recorded U/s 183 B.N.S.S. The victim by her looks seems to be major, although she is stated to be 16 years old. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that there is no medical corroboration of the incident, as such, the allegations of rape are false. The criminal history of two cases assigned to the applicant stands explained vide supplementary affidavit filed today in Court. The applicant is languishing in jail since 14.8.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application. 8. The Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2020 (11) SCC 648 has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his case of bail is made out. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the statement of the victim recorded U/s 183 B.N.S.S and there being no medical corroboration of the incident coupled with the fact that criminal antecedent of the applicant stands explained, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant- Shivam @ Shubham, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence. (ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 12. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 30.4.2025 Vikas (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad